Ep(l'c,l'T)4GN(5)Ep(l',l'c,l'T)L2c T=1(l'c)(l'T)2a12-C34(l'T)4+[C2-34(l'c)+C6(l'Tl'c)4+C4(l'T)4
](l' c)2-[C14+C5(l'T)4](l'c)4,   C1,C2,C4 >0, C3,C5,C6<0

where \(\tilde{E}_p(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c,l^{\prime }T)\)  is the redefined \(E_p(l^{\prime },l^{\prime }\Lambda _c,l^{\prime }T)\)  which is given by eq.(REF ) and the numerical constants \(C_4\) , \(C_5\)  and \(C_6\)  are given by eq.(REF ) in appendix . As one can see, \(l\)  does not play any role in our final result which is in complete agreement with the results obtained in [1]}. The first term in eq.(REF ) which is the leading term, obeys an area law divergence in \(l^{\prime }\rightarrow 0\)  limit, where the two subsystems touch each other. The second term, including \(C_3\) , is dominant term in the finite temperature corrections which is always positive and hence the finite temperature corrections increase \(\tilde{E}_p(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c,l^{\prime }T)\) . The term including \(C_2\)  and the logarithmic term are the dominant terms in the non-conformal effects. Since these terms are always positive the non-conformal effects increase \(\tilde{E}_p(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c,l^{\prime }T)\) . From eq.(REF ) we observe that for fixed \(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c\)  (\(l^{\prime }T\) ) \(\tilde{E}_p(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c,l^{\prime }T)\)  decreases by increasing \(l^{\prime }T\)  (\(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c\) ). This result depicted clearly in figure REF  where we plot \(\tilde{E}_p(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c,l^{\prime }T)\)  in terms of \(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c\)  (\(l^{\prime }T\) ) for fixed \(l^{\prime }T\)  (\(l^{\prime }\Lambda _c\) ). If we set \(T=0\) , we reproduce the previous results which is obtained for MAdS background in the intermediate energy limit eq.(REF ).
